Anne Silva LIS 600 Intellectual Freedom in the United States Current Issues and Events that Affect the Intellectual Freedom of Americans Introduction . Intellectual freedom can be loosely defined as the “freedom to think.” At first thought intellectual freedom is something that we all have the right to exercise daily and are often encouraged to do so. In this paper I’ll explore the dynamics of this freedom in context with things that enhance our intellectual freedoms here in the United States as well as those things that may hinder them. I will also look at how the idea of and issues with intellectual freedom affect libraries and librarians. Friends of Intellectual Freedom The First Amendment Intellectual Freedom is often cited as a First Amendment right under the Constitution of the United States. The First Amendment reads: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” Intellectual freedom isn’t directly cited, but many, including Neil M. Richards in his article "Intellectual Privacy”(p2), argue that intellectual freedom is implied within the First Amendment. Intellectual freedom is needed in order to form thoughts to speak freely, write freely, or express grievances. One of the reasons intellectual freedom is so hard to define, measure, or censor is because it’s almost impossible to study something so liquid, subjective, and spontaneous within a data-driven, objective environment. A law, governing body, or other influence can control or measure the access to resources and information that may help one exercise their freedoms, but to control intellectual freedom would be to control the entire thought process of an individual. Intellectual freedom is something that cannot be eradicated. It can be encouraged or stifled, but the freedom to think can’t be completely controlled by any governing body. It’s intangible and most often immeasurable. But this doesn’t mean that our intellectual freedom isn’t at jeopardy. Even in the United States, there are events, legislation and groups of people who are either aiding in the continuation of that right or trying to stifle, if not our intellectual freedom, our freedom to express those ideas.
The American Civil Liberties Union According to its website, the ACLU cites it’s main goal as to protect American’s First Amendment rights, as well as well as legal rights and privacy. They do a lot of legal and legislative work to promote the rights of individuals as well as groups, and often take up causes that they view as infringing upon American civil liberties. While on it’s website the ACLU doesn’t specifically address intellectual freedom, It does address the First Amendment, privacy, including issues such as surveillance, censorship and the Patriot Act. Because intellectual freedom could be considered a civil liberty and a right of Americans, it can be assumed that they would come to the aid of a person or people whose right to intellectual freedom was infringed upon. The ACLU has worked previously with the ALA on key intellectual rights issues. Libraries, Librarians, and the American Library Association The American Library Association is the largest professional Organization in America for Librarians and other Library professionals. It also accredits library schools, offers grants, scholarships, and funding for other causes. It is also a champion for intellectual freedom and the First Amendment rights as they pertain to librarians, libraries, and library users. The ALA has an entire office dedicated to intellectual freedom and protecting that freedom. The ALA Code of Ethics provides an outline of where the ALA stands on issues such as intellectual freedom, is followed by ALA members and adopted by many other library professionals. As it pertains to intellectual freedom, the ALA code of ethics reads as follows: I. II. III.
“We provide the highest level of service to all library users through appropriate and usefully organized resources; equitable service policies; equitable access; and accurate, unbiased, and courteous responses to all requests. We uphold the principles of intellectual freedom and resist all efforts to censor library resources. We protect each library user's right to privacy and confidentiality with respect to information sought or received and resources consulted, borrowed, acquired or transmitted.” (http://www.ala.org/ala/issuesadvocacy/proethics/codeofethics/codeethics.cfm)
Point I addresses equal access and access to a well rounded, accurate collection. Access to all types of information and courteous people to help find it are imperative to patrons exercising their rights to intellectual freedom. If the collection is bias or the patrons fear judgment by librarians or library staff, their intellectual freedoms could be stifled. This same theory could be used for section III. If user’s fear their privacy and confidentiality are at jeopardy, they may choose to not access information, thus hindering
their intellectual freedom. The ALA code of ethics is the jumping off point for all work the ALA does. The roles of librarians as “gatekeepers”, information and collection managers, and the “face” of the library are not to be taken lightly. If librarians don’t act within the scope of the ethics described above, they have the power to perpetuate ignorance, to give bias information, to judge patrons based on the information accessed, or to censor library materials. It is not the librarian’s position to judge information or how it is used, but to present the best information, based on a set of strongly constructed criteria, and present the information without censoring patron or self. All of these things directly affect a user’s intellectual freedom, or influence a patron to believe that self –censorship of their intellectual freedom is necessary. The Library Bill of Rights is another publication created by the American Library Association. Much like the Patient Bill of Rights in medical offices, the Library Bill of Rights states the fundamental rights of library users. All points in the Library Bill of Rights involve the issue of intellectual freedom. The main points are that materials should be neither included or excluded based on content, views, or doctrine, and that libraries should strive to hold materials with different views on a subject. It also states that “Libraries should challenge censorship in the fulfillment of their responsibility to provide information and enlightenment”, and that “Libraries should cooperate with all persons and groups concerned with resisting abridgment of free expression and free access to ideas.” This illustrates why the ALA and the ACLU are often in cooperation with one another when an issue that relates to First Amendment rights come up in the public sphere, although they have no formal ties except for common ground on their beliefs of intellectual freedom. It also includes that the library should be available to all people, and that spaces, including those that can be reserved, should be equally accessible to groups and individuals regardless of the type of group or their set of beliefs. (http://www.ala.org/ala/issuesadvocacy/intfreedom/librarybill/index.cfm) As well as being available on the ALA’s website, the American Library Association also publishes this plus more in their publication “Intellectual Freedom Manual”, now in its 8th edition, available both online and in print for a small fee. The Library Bill of Right’s sole function is to protect the intellectual freedom of library users. This includes equal access to information, a well-rounded, unbiased collection, and a staff that puts their own opinions and doctrines aside in order to benefit the library and its users. Because libraries are still alive and well as the hub of learning and intellectualism, if intellectual freedom is compromised within the library, be it public, special, or academic, the demise of intellectual freedom and our other, more clearly defined first amendment rights in other arenas are sure to follow. Events Banned book week is supported and organized by the ALA. The week is meant to bring awareness to the dangers of censorship within the United States. Banned Book
Week, held in September, “highlights the benefits of free and open access to information.” Intellectual freedom is a large part of Banned Book Week(BBW) and the ALA addresses this on the Banned Book Week Page of their website, which states “Intellectual freedom—the freedom to access information and express ideas, even if the information and ideas might be considered unorthodox or unpopular—provides the foundation for Banned Books Week. BBW stresses the importance of ensuring the availability of unorthodox or unpopular viewpoints for all who wish to read and access them.” (http://www.ala.org/ala/issuesadvocacy/banned/bannedbooksweek/index.cfm) Privacy Week Privacy Week and its website, privacyrevolution.org are also sponsored by the ALA, specifically the Office of Intellectual Freedom. Its purpose is to inform people about the issues of privacy, especially the way technology changes the way privacy is viewed and attained. Privacy, or a lack there of is one of the biggest concerns negatively affecting intellectual freedom within the United States. Its purpose is to educate the public, specifically Internet and library users, as how to demand privacy in the digital age. (www.privacyrevolution.org) Potential Threats to Intellectual Freedom Censorship Our First Amendment rights of freedom of speech and freedom of the press protect us from governmental censorship, with exception to cases of libel, slander, public safety (you can’t yell fire in a crowded theatre), and national security-some people with classified jobs within corporations or the government may have access to privileged information they don’t have a right to disclose, and my provide national security or privacy concerns if this information is made available to the general public. Childhood censorship is a hot topic of debate, weather it be on the Internet in public libraries, in school libraries, etc, but for the purposes of this paper I’ll be looking at censorship as it pertains to the adult population. Censorship covers all parts of the information and material production and acquiring process, but I’ll be mainly looking at the restriction of access to materials that are already produced. If it is legal to express and produce, legal to house, either within four walls or on the World Wide Web, it should be legal to access without fear of judgment or repercussions. Censorship at the access level is a threat to intellectual freedom because blocking users of certain information or prohibiting them from producing it can impede upon the natural progression of inquiry that is arguably innate within the human psyche. It can stifle curiosity, limit the development of tolerance and empathy, and limit access to opposing beliefs, leading to an underdeveloped sense of self and a belief system that may not be well rounded. One can often learn just as much from reading information that they
don’t agree with as opposed to only being exposed to information that goes along with their personal belief system. In countries where censorship is a major concern and a major infraction on human rights, the government is often the culprit. For instance, in North Korea, named the number one most censored country by the Committee to Protect Journalists in a study done in 2006, “all ‘news’ is positive. According to the country's rigidly controlled media, North Korea has never suffered famine or poverty, and citizens would willingly sacrifice themselves for their leader”. The government controls all news outlets, and controls when these outlets can be accessed, as well as by whom. (http://cpj.org/reports/2006/05/10most-censored-countries.php) In the United States, the biggest threats to censorship are individual institutions, such as special interest groups, religious organizations, and radical political groups who want to see information and books taken off of library shelves and out of bookstores in an effort to project their agenda, or to keep the “moral compass” of the country or a specific group of people intact. Because of this, a new term, “challenged” books, has come into existence and includes those books that are often requested to be taken off of shelves or contested in school curriculum. There is often a formal “challenge” process. More than one book a day is challenged in the United States today using a formal system (American Libraries 40.11 p. 48). Censorship, while highly unethical and in breach of professional standards, may also happen by librarians or other third parties who are supposed to remain neutral. Self-censorship is another form of censorship that may inhibit one’s intellectual freedom. Self-censorship as related to self restriction of access to materials may happen for several different reasons, including religious beliefs, social pressures, fear of judgment from librarians or others who may assist in the information seeking process, or a fear of lack of privacy, either from the eyes of passerby’s, librarians and other staff members, online trackers, or the federal government. Self-censorship of librarians and their collections is also an issue, and many times for the same reasons as patrons seeking information. “It appears that librarians do not self-censor because they personally disagree with the content of the book, but because they are leery of having to defend their choices to hostile parents and community members” (Moellendick). Privacy A user’s physical and intellectual privacy is critical to one’s right to not selfcensor and to use their intellectual freedom to its fullest. If a user feels that their privacy is at risk, then they may not seek or access the information they want or need, stopping their thought process. The progressions of modern technology as well as the invention of the Internet and World Wide Web add a whole additional sphere to privacy and right to privacy issues. A good example of the threats of privacy comes from Google Chrome, a Windows enabled Internet browser. When opening an “incognito” window, one that stores no information, such as history entries or cookies, on your computer once the window is
closed, a privacy warning serves as the browser homepage. In big bold letters it states, “Going incognito doesn't affect the behavior of other people, servers, or software.” It continues to warn, in a sort of joking way, of the dangers of a lack of privacy by the government, websites that store and track your internet use, and “people standing behind you”(Google Chrome “Incognito” welcome screen). This goes to show that while people can use products like Google Chrome to help protect their privacy online, threats come from many different angles and can be almost impossible to eliminate completely. Many people fear that surveillance and records may be accessed and used against them in a breach of privacy, and the Patriot Act of 2001 have, in some ways, substantiated those fears. Others fear that surveillance of watchful librarians family or other close social circle members may cast them in a different light, change their reputation, or disclose personal information that they’d rather not be revealed. “Surveillance or interference can warp the integrity of our freedom of thought and can skew the way we think, with clear repercussions for the content of our subsequent speech or writing. The ability to freely make up our minds to develop new ideas thus depends upon a substantial measure of intellectual privacy. In this way intellectual privacy is a cornerstone of meaningful First Amendment liberties”(Richards, Neil M p2). There are a multitude of things librarians can do within the physical space of their library and within the scope of their profession to ensure privacy and make patron’s feel comfortable making full use of all they have access to. They can, for instance, make sure that computers are screen shielded, and out of view of passersby when possible. They can also make sure that their computers don’t track history, collect cookies or retain screen names, email addresses, or passwords. They can provide room to read and study and write with plenty of space around them to ensure a sense of privacy. Another option is the self-checkout option, ideal for patrons who are checking out materials that may have a stigma attached to them. While these records are available to librarians, the potentially awkward face-to-face transaction is eliminated. They can also give patrons the option of past due notices and notice of fees and fines be sent electronically to their email,, thus saving the library money and ensuring that the mail isn’t received by a family member, roommate, or another person in the home. Another major way libraries can ensure privacy is to keep as few records as possible while still allowing the library to function, and discarding of old or outdated records that are no longer of relevance. The Patriot Act The Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism (USA PATRIOT) Act of 2001 is one of the most current pieces of legislation affecting privacy of library user’s the role of librarians. Section 215 specifically addresses library and bookstore records and is one of the most controversial sections of the act. For the purposes of this paper I’ll be looking specifically at section 215. One of the reasons the provisions that the Patriot Act enacted are so hard to define for the general public is because the act itself and it’s basic timeline are so confusing. With sunset dates, amendments, extensions of congressional deadlines and finally and
extension of the act itself, many are confused about what parts of the act are still in effect. While doing research, I consulted three different librarians via the IMinerva chat reference available at the Jackson Library website, and got three different answers. One was that act 215 had indeed run its course and was no longer in effect, one saying that it was extended until February 2011, and one directing me on how to find the information myself via the subject guides, which I had previously done with little success on the current standing of the act and section 215. I then came across an article in CQ Weekly that says the provisions set to expire, including section 215, had been renewed for a year, until February 2011 by HR 3961 (Ethridge, Emily, and Greg Vadala p.1). Section 215 addresses public records, as well as gag orders on librarians. Librarians are allowed to speak with their attorneys because of the confidentiality agreement between lawyers and clients. The bill enables the FBI to “Seek orders from a special federal court for “any tangible thing” that it says is related to a terrorism investigation. Critics say the language is too broad and could allow the government access to nearly any record. The Justice Department told Congress in September 2009 that the provision is necessary for FBI investigators to obtain information “that does not fall within the scope of authorities relating to national security letters” (Ethridge, Emily, and Greg Vadala p.1). The ALA’s position on section 215 of the Patriot Act is best described in ‘The Resolution on the Reauthorization of Section 215 of the USA Patriot Act.” This resolution expresses that “the USA PATRIOT ACT includes provisions such as Section 215 that threaten the free and open exchange of knowledge and information” and that “orders issued under Section 215 automatically impose a nondisclosure or gag order on the recipients, thereby prohibiting the reporting of abuse of government authority and abrogating the recipients’ First Amendment rights.” Conclusion Privacy and the lack of censorship are imperative to an individual’s intellectual freedom. While there are champions of intellectual freedom, including the ALA and the ACLU, who advocate strongly against censorship and a lack of privacy, there are also things threatening this right protected under the First Amendment, including the USA Patriot Act. As library students and professionals, intellectual freedom is at the forefront of what we do, it is why our professions exist. Although we can’t control government legislation, we can do everything within our library and within our power as librarians to ensure that our patron’s can enjoy their intellectual freedoms to the fullest extent. If people don’t feel comfortable exercising their right to intellectual freedom within the walls of the library, the trend is sure to follow in other spheres.
Works Cited “10 Most Censured Countries.” committee to protect journalists: defending journalists worldwide. Nd. 20 Sept. 2010. "ALA | IF Resolutions," American Library Association, nd. 20 Sept. 2010 http://www.ala.org/template.cfm? section=ifresolutions&template=/contentmanagement/contentdisplay.cfm&conten tid=11891 “Amendment I. The bill of Rights, a Transcription. The US National Archives and Records Administration. Nd. 18. Sept. 2010: http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/bill_of_rights_transcript.html "Code of Ethics," American Library Association. 07July 2006. 19 Sept. 2010 http://www.ala.org/ala/issuesadvocacy/proethics/codeofethics/codeethics.cfm Ethridge, Emily, and Greg Vadala. "Expiring Anti-Terrorism Provisions Receive OneYear Extension." CQ Weekly 68.9 (2010): 500. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. Web. 21 Sept. 2010. Moellendick, Cora McAndrews. "Libraries, Censors, and Self-Censorship." PNLA Quarterly 73.4 (2009): 68-76. Library Lit & Inf Full Text. Web. 21 Sep. 2010 Richards, Neil M. "Intellectual Privacy." Texas Law Review 87.2 (2008): 387445.Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. Web. 19 Sept. 2010. “Library Bill of Rights," American Library Association. 30 June 2006. 19 Sept. 2010. http://www.ala.org/ala/issuesadvocacy/intfreedom/librarybill/index.cfm “The Situation.” Privacy Revolution:Our Story.20 sept.2010 http://www.privacyrevolution.org/index.php/our-story/the_situation/
“Library Bill of Rights," American Library Association. 30 June 2006. 19 Sept. 2010. http://www.ala.org/ala/issuesadvocacy/intfreedom/librarybill/index.cfm The USA Patriot Act in the Library," American Library Association.29 May 2007. 18.sept. 2010 http://www.ala.org/ala/aboutala/offices/oif/ifissues/usapatriotactlibrary.cfm The Freedom to Read." American Libraries 40.11 (2009): 48-9. Library Lit & Inf Full Text. Web. 21 Sep. 2010 USA PATRIOT Act .U.S. H.R. 3162, Public Law107-56, Title 2, section 105, 107th Congress Oct 26 2001. "USA PATRIOT Act Analysis by OIF," American Library Association. 29 May 2007. 18 Sept. 2010. http://www.ala.org/ala/aboutala/offices/oif/ifissues/issuesrelatedlinks/usapatriotac tanalysis.cfm